Talk:North Carolina Sullivan Acts

A fact from North Carolina Sullivan Acts appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 23 April 2012 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that as a result of the North Carolina Sullivan Acts, Asheville is the only city in the state that cannot charge a higher water rate for consumers outside city limits? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2012/April. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/North Carolina Sullivan Acts.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States: North Carolina / Government Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject North Carolina (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Mid-importance). Politics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

In response to the DYK nomination, I have reviewed this article and found it to be of a C-class rating. With a bit more work, it should easily be a B-class rating. Please post discussion and feedback here. Keep up the good work. Kayz911 (talk) 08:21, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

JoannaSerah, Actually I would really like to keep the City of Asheville in because I am talking specifically about the government entity. If I then say Asheville, I allow people to understand that just Asheville means ratepayers and everyone else living in Asheville.Sgr2124 (talk) 13:22, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Under Problems and Advocates sections, the tag for outdated information was placed upon the section, however there was no constructive feedback for the authors or examples of such outdated information. I am going to remove that tag until someone can replace it and list their concerns on the talk page. You have to justify a tag like that Kayz911 (talk) 15:21, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have to justify the tag if it isn't obvious - in this case, it should be immediately obvious to anyone who reads the section. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:25, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The page has been updated. But someone took the picture I had on previously, though it was taken from a government website where they admitted that once the picture was posted, it was public property. What is the best course for getting it back on? Sgr2124 (talk) 01:14, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Figure out who deleted it (go to where the image used to be, it should say) and ask them why they did so. Alternatively, reupload it and be clearer about the licensing (I didn't see the original, so don't know what the specific problem might have been). Nikkimaria (talk) 04:22, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looking back through the edit history, I think Sgr2124 might be talking about the picture of Tim Moffitt. It looks like it was deleted from commons since it didn't have a license attached showing that it was freely able to be used. After it was deleted from commons, a bot came around and deleted/hid the code from this article. You could try to re-upload it with the correct license/explanation attached. One thing to note, though, is that if this was his NC General Assembly photo or other NC state website, there has already been some discussion and research into whether this is a freely usable photo or not. It doesn't appear that WP can use those. Otherwise, I'm sure every General Assembly or statewide elected official article would have their photos also. The info and photos NC publishes is not automatically freely usable, I don't believe. I have seen that discussion on here before somewhere. Will try to find it and link to it. More importantly though, I don't know that it is necessary to put his picture on there. Of all the people over time who've worked on this, just putting his photo in seems to be possibly undue weight and promo for him. Thank you. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 18:48, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

can you help me cite the court case? I changed the format a little, but I'm not quite sure which numbers are which. Also, what other cites/wiki-links did you have a problem with? Thanks.Sgr2124 (talk) 02:38, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Legal citation systems work differently in the US so I don't know the details, but see examples like

Stuartyeates (talk) 03:20, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by

]